Jeff Law wrote: > (*) Imagine something like this (and related variants) > > EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP (bitmap, 0, i, bi) > { > blah blah blah > > if (bitmap_empty_p (bitmap)) > { > modify bitmap > break; > } > more blah blah > } > > We exit without iterating BI and thus miss your check.
That's OK; there's no problem if you don't use the iterator again after you modify the bitmap. cheers, DaveK